No. Scott Aaronson said that it changed it from 3% to 5% for him, which is a lot more generous than I would be (but he knows far more about the subject than I do).
> does this update your priors significantly in the direction of P=NP?
My answer is no ... and Aaronson's answer would also be no ... clearly he doesn't view a change from 3% to 5% to be significant ... his response downplayed the significance of !ETH in re NP?=P. So apparently you downvoted me for simply stating my own opinion while you completely misunderstood what it was an opinion of.
Yes, it doubles the probability that I win the lotto. Yes, doubling a probability is significant. I'm not sure you're using the term "prior" correctly here, though.
As I said, it doubles the probability. That is an easily verifiable fact. Not sure why you are calling it facetious. I feel like you are trying to make some point about small probabilities being effectively indistinguishable from zero, but for some reason you don't want to articulate that?
Anyway, 3% is very very clearly distinguishable from 0% and so is 5%.
[–] randallsquared 3 days ago
[–] jibalt 3 days ago
> does this update your priors significantly in the direction of P=NP?
My answer is no ... and Aaronson's answer would also be no ... clearly he doesn't view a change from 3% to 5% to be significant ... his response downplayed the significance of !ETH in re NP?=P. So apparently you downvoted me for simply stating my own opinion while you completely misunderstood what it was an opinion of.
[–] baobabKoodaa 3 days ago
[–] maybeOneDay 2 days ago
[–] baobabKoodaa 2 days ago
[–] maybeOneDay 1 day ago
[–] baobabKoodaa 1 day ago
Anyway, 3% is very very clearly distinguishable from 0% and so is 5%.